1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates generally to the field of exercise equipment, and more specifically to exercise apparatus for aerobic, strength, balance, and skill training that permits a user to perform a simulated bicycling exercise.
2. Description of the Related Art
Cardio-pulmonary, cardiovascular, and strength training exercise equipment found in today's exercise and health centers as well as in the home seek to improve and maintain an individual's aerobic and strength fitness. Many types of exercise equipment, including treadmills, rowing machines, stationary bicycles, stair-stepping machines, skiing machines (cross country and alpine), and dry-land swimming machines are available for individuals who desire to maintain and improve their overall fitness and conditioning.
Stationary bicycles provide users a means for exercising certain muscles, generally involving the legs, and to a much lesser extent, if any, the center core, i.e. abdominal and lower torso muscles that help cyclist balance, arms and upper body muscles, i.e. biceps, triceps, oblique's and back. The current state of stationary bicycle designs have typically been limited to designs that affix a pair of handlebars, pedals, and seat to a single rigid platform, e.g. bolted in place and resting on a floor, configured to replicate only the spinning dynamic associated with pedaling a bicycle. In this arrangement, current designs are able to simulate only a very limited number of the total dynamic forces found when actually riding, for example a conventional bicycle, and situate the user in a fixed and unchanging posture unlike a conventional bicycle. Operating today's stationary bicycle in a fixed posture or position may lead to numbing of certain nerves in the rider's body as well as body parts close to the bicycle seat, such as the prostate, due to the seat contact pressures remaining relatively constant while riding the stationary bicycle.
The inability of today's stationary bicycle designs to replicate or simulate the actual dynamic forces exhibited while riding a conventional bicycle, also limits the number and type of muscle groups involved. These designs do not engage many of the muscles required to propel and balance a conventional bicycle, nor do such stationary bikes address certain core muscles in the rider's physique. Such stationary bicycles can be considered undesirable and generally inadequate for training by cycling enthusiasts and devoted competitors. Designs limited in this manner are unable to provide a simulation of the overall cycling experience and do not involve the muscle groups as found when riding a bike.
Other designs attempt to improve the simulation by involving the use of an existing conventional bicycle positioned on stationary rollers or on a stand where the rear tire does not make contact with the ground. Such a stand may employ a resistance mechanism, for example a magnetic trainer stand.
Stationary roller designs typically involve a conventional bicycle and a stationary cylindrical rolling mechanism where the rider first places the bicycle onto a series of rollers. Once the bicycle is properly positioned, the cyclist may mount and begin to pedal and balance the conventional bike. A major reason for the lack of popularity with stationary roller designs is that they are difficult to learn and master and can be dangerous to operate. Although designs of this type may offer additional comfort because the seat moves in relation to the contact area of the rear tire and rollers and may allow the torque from the pedals to influence the movement of the bike over the rollers, this arrangement remains undesirable because it does not relieve pressure on the seat contact area, i.e. “bike seat syndrome” including a numbing of nerves and body parts adjacent to or near the seat. The roller design does not allow the user to adequately lean and steer the bicycle while exercising.
Stand designs, including those employing the magnetic trainer, are similar in operation to current stationary bike designs and are subject to the same limitations found in roller and stationary designs.
Part of the issue with stationary bicycle designs involving a rolling mechanism is the act of mounting and beginning to pedal on a stationary roller design is quite different than starting a bicycle. Roller designs are also subject to having the entire bike wander, causing the user to lose balance or slipping off of the rollers. Since the rollers are typically positioned on a hard surface, such as a concrete floor as typically found in exercise and health centers, if the user loses balance at any point while performing the exercise, they typically will fall and impact the ground and are thus subjected to potential injuries.
In order for a cyclist to properly ride a conventional bicycle, the user must provide propulsion by spinning the pedals, steer by turning the handlebar to control the direction of the bicycle, and maintaining balance, i.e. lean, turn, stop, accelerate and de-accelerate, etc. Properly riding a bicycle requires a cyclist or user to apply numerous complex and dynamic turning and leaning forces at the handlebar, pedals, and seat, or any combination thereof simultaneously in multiple directions with varying intensities to balance, control, steer, and propel a bicycle. A cyclist may provide additional steering force to further control and direct the amount of roll and yaw, i.e. lean, tilt, etc., exhibited by the frame, for example during a turn by moving his hips to one side.
Today's stationary designs are unable to adequately respond to turning and leaning forces applied by the user at the pedals, handlebar, and seat. Roller designs remain difficult and dangerous to operate and are ill suited for usage in a group or class setting.
Current stationary bicycle designs tend to be relatively limited in that the user's only significant dynamic interaction with the apparatus occurs at the pedals, limiting the exercise simulation to the pedaling portion of the riding experience. Such designs are limited in the muscle groups involved and the quality of the spinning action that may be produced. Users of such devices would likely be interested in devices that simulate the overall cycling experience and desire to obtain the benefit of engaging a broader range of the muscle groups required to ride a conventional bicycle.
It would therefore be beneficial to provide a bicycle exercise apparatus that more accurately simulates the operation of a conventional bicycle and overcomes the limitations found in current stationary bicycle designs.